240 likes | 383 Views
Feasibility of Open Access for journals supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). ElPub 2007, Vienna University of Technology, Austria June 13-15, 2007. Leslie Chan, U of Toronto Scarborough
E N D
Feasibility of Open Access for journals supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) ElPub 2007, Vienna University of Technology, Austria June 13-15, 2007 Leslie Chan, U of Toronto Scarborough Fran Groen, McGill University Jean-Claude Gudeon, U de Montréal
Background • Why the study? • Methods • Key observations • Recommendations
What is SSHRC? • an arm's-length federal agency that promotes and supports university-based research and training in the social sciences and humanities • founded in 1977, invests more than $300 million annually in research • Aid to Scholarly Publishing Program: Monographs and Journals
Why the study? • SSHRC Council adopted OA in principle in October 2004 • Initial consultation in 2005 • Need for broader consultation • Policy development • Implementation
Support for OA No Yes Initial Consultation by SSHRC 2005
Current study • 161 Journals that received funding from SSHRC 2004-7 • Questionnaire to journal editors or key contacts • Citation analysis of SSHRC-funded journals using ISI Journal Citation Report • Interview of selected publishers and librarians
Key findings • The 161 journals received a total of $6,582,255 from 2004-07 • Range of grant over three years: $2,906 to $73,370 • 29 journals (18% of titles) received the maximum grant for a total of $2,127,730 • Grants cover on average 45-50% of a journal’s operating cost • All journals have a minimum of 250 paid subscribers, thought the total are difficult to estimate in most cases
Questionnaire results • Web based survey conducted in May and June 2006 • 42% response rate (67 out of 161 journals) • 56 Anglophone and 11 Francophone
Questionnaire results • 80% of journals are online • Some as early as 1993, but most came on since 2002 • Only 40% of the journals have the most recent issue online • Variety of formats, from scans to true text • Metadata standard lacking • Few have long term preservation plan
Questionnaire results • 84% of English journals reply on aggregators for online delivery (Proquest being most popular) • All 9 Francophone journals report the use of Érudit • 55% of English journals receive no financial compensation from aggregators • None of the Francophone journals receive financial compensation
Questionnaire results • There were considerable confusion regarding ownership of digital rights to the journals • Some thought aggregators own the rights, some thought authors do, while others thought the publishers
Questionnaire results • Are you in favour of open access in principle (leaving economic issues aside for the moment)? • English: 78% of 54 respondents said yes • French: 60% or 10 respondents said yes • Many objected to the way the question was phrased!
Questionnaire results • Immediate OA or 6 months moving wall? • English: 74% of 49 respondents favoured moving wall • French: 91% of 11 respondents favoured moving wall
Questionnaire results • Should SSHRC mandate OA for journals receiving aid? • English: 84% of 57 respondents opposed mandating OA • French: 82% of 11 respondents opposed mandting OA
Questionnaire results • Should SSHRC provide financial support for subscription-based journals to become OA? • English: 71% of 52 respondents said yes • French: 64% of 11 respondents said yes
Questionnaire results • Should SSHRC provide support for OA journals and consider eligibility criteria appropriate for these titles? • English: 82% of 49 respondents said yes • French: 64% of 11 respondents said yes • Peer review is regarded by most respondents as being the key criterion
Questionnaire results • Qualitative responses • Many expressed concerns and distrust with SSHRC’s policy • Major concern with financial viability • How could lost revenue through subscription be recouped • Some favour an extended moving wall (up to 2 years) to minimize potential lost • Some are concern what money spent on supporting OA journals will diminish support for traditional titles
Citation analysis • Of the 161 titles (90 titles in the social sciences), only 21 titles (23 %) had an impact factor assigned by ISI in 1997 or 2005 • 2 titles with an impact factor in 1997 had lost it by 2005. • 3 titles had an impact factor in 2005 but not in 1997. This means that only 19 titles had an impact factor in 2005 (or 21% of the social science titles supported by SSHRC). • No SSHRC-supported humanities journal appears in the 21 titles.
Citation analysis • The majority of SSHRC-supported journals simply do not appear in ISI. • Those that appear, with very few exceptions, hold a very modest rank. Their impact factor compared to the leading publication in their own field is often minuscule. • Only two titles are ranked in the top ten of their respective fields. • Impact factors of the few titles that have them suggest that AUTHORS publishing in SSHRC-supported journal will not be readily cited.
Observations • The low citation and usage of SSHRC funded journals call into question the return on investment on SSHRC funding • Will OA increase the usage and impact of articles published in SSHRC funded journals? • If so, what additional cost could make this happen?
Recommendations -- “Green” road • Regarding journals: SSHRC should mandate that all SSHRC supported jouranls be made “green” • Regarding authors: SSHRC funded authors should self-archiving their publications in institutional repositories • Regarding Institutional Repositories: SSHRC should collaborate with all relevant organizations and institutions to ensure interoperability and standards of IR
Recommendations -- “Gold” road • SSHRC should conduct experiments with journals willing to transition to OA • SSHRC should begin a pilot OA journal program and monitor its progress over a three year period • SSHRC should establish eligibility criteria for OA journals so they can receive subsidy • SSHRC should encourage the development of alternative metrices for the evaluation of journals - move from need based to usage based
Conclusions • Indeed Not One Size Fits All • And OA is not All or None • But the Future is in our hands • To SSHRC: Supporting SS & H journals is worthwhile, but money could be better spent on improving access and research impact - so OA is the best route
Afterword • SSHRC announced, in May 2007, a new one-year experimental program supporting OA journal http://www.sshrc.ca/web/apply/program_descriptions/open_access_journals_e.asp • Maximum funding for a journal: $25,000 • Usage based metric • $850 per article • Up to $5000 for distribution, electronic platform etc. • Quality criteria - peer review and international editorial board